Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
21–30 of 102 posts
Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#22Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#23The main action advocated by the author here is to increase efficiency (in insulation, appliances, food production, transportation) as a means to curb CO2 emissions and slow climate change - all very important. Lately I've been reading Saul Griffith's book "Electrify" which proposes a different tack - "simply" electrify all energy usage and let people maintain their current lifestyles exactly. Interestingly, doing so…
Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#24I am all in to be a good custodian of the world. But I am tired of the insipid, agitated state, screaming and pushing fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). When I was a young man, I was told the world will freeze, and within five years we will all die. (Good times for fur trade!) Then, the ozone layer will be gone, and within five years we will all die. (SPF 5000 anyone?) Suddenly in the early '80s it flipped to the wo…
Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#25The main action advocated by the author here is to increase efficiency (in insulation, appliances, food production, transportation) as a means to curb CO2 emissions and slow climate change - all very important. Lately I've been reading Saul Griffith's book "Electrify" which proposes a different tack - "simply" electrify all energy usage and let people maintain their current lifestyles exactly. Interestingly, doing so…
Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#26This system works great if you want to optimize for price. Even if a nation want to sell cheap in order to fund an invasion force, the buyer can continue as before and just buy based on the price. Similar for carbon emissions, as the buyer doesn't feel responsible for the subsidies. If there is an offer on the connected market then the buyer can buy it.
Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#27I am all in to be a good custodian of the world. But I am tired of the insipid, agitated state, screaming and pushing fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). When I was a young man, I was told the world will freeze, and within five years we will all die. (Good times for fur trade!) Then, the ozone layer will be gone, and within five years we will all die. (SPF 5000 anyone?) Suddenly in the early '80s it flipped to the wo…
The underlying agenda is a push towards centralised control and ownership of everything. You can't control the world's emissions if you can't control everything everyone does.
Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#28I am all in to be a good custodian of the world. But I am tired of the insipid, agitated state, screaming and pushing fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD). When I was a young man, I was told the world will freeze, and within five years we will all die. (Good times for fur trade!) Then, the ozone layer will be gone, and within five years we will all die. (SPF 5000 anyone?) Suddenly in the early '80s it flipped to the wo…
Re: Climate change won’t wait for future innovation – we need action now
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does more natural gas have to be part of the answer?
If you switch all the wood burning in third world countries, and all the coal fired stations to natural gas, you reduce emissions considerably. You need to do this because third world countries can't afford renewables, or there simply isn't enough supply to roll it out quickly (within 10-20 years). But they burn a lot of wood, which is unnecessary, and can be switched to gas cheaply and easily. Considering it will st…
I'll stop you right there because the major producers of greenhouse gasses aren't third world countries. Historically, the majority of greenhouse gasses emitted comes from industrialized nations.
> can be switched to gas cheaply and easily
I highly doubt that. Gas distribution requires a fine grained pipeline infrastructure which needs constant maintenance. That's a massive upfront cost in developing countries and new economies like India where the domestic market lacks such infrastructure in many places. Not to mention challenges regarding security and geography.
Given the respective individual income level in those countries, it's far cheaper to source energy locally from wood, manure and - above all - coal.
Moreover, the big issue isn't what new economies like India aren't emitting today. But what they are very much willing to emit in the near future in order to raise overall living standards to a level comparable with the West.
At this point, wagging fingers what they should or shouldn't do is a non-sequitur since Western nations carry a historical responsibility for their own industrial pasts.
In the documentary "Before the Flood", this dillemma is being made abundantly clear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ia5fMomBXbE